Viewpoint

The 2007 Senior Survey asked students if the Writing Portfolio was useful based on a 5-point scale. Because of a coding error in the survey, the results were essentially flopped (1 represented “strongly agree” instead of “strongly disagree,” etc.). After adjusting for this error, only 27% of seniors rated the experience as useful. While this discovery may not surprise you, it is unnerving to think that evaluations of the Writing Portfolio have been influenced by faulty data. Further, this error went unnoticed for over a year.

“Today we know what is right, and today we know what is wrong. The slaughter of innocents is wrong. Two million people driven from their homes is wrong. Women gang raped while gathering firewood is wrong. And silence, acquiescence and paralysis in the face of genocide is wrong.”

Last week Jacob Schack took Carleton’s support of the National Merit Scholarship to task as part of an ongoing series of articles about Carleton’s budget priorities. He argues that the scholarship is a waste of money, and that it does nothing to improve the quality of students who come here because it unfairly favors privileged students who can afford expensive prep courses. I am a low-income student and the National Merit Scholarship was a major component of making Carleton affordable for me. I never took any prep courses. I scored well on the PSAT because I was the sort of person who should be going to Carleton.

The outcome of the vote broadcasts a change in the way Carleton students have chosen to tackle the issues that MPIRG represents. This is a positive move for the college. The environmental and social justice issues that MPIRG stands for will not cease to be important to the students of our campus. Carleton students have impacted local, state and national issues, both under broader organizations and under initiative entirely independent of any outside support. It is entirely possible that without the structure and support of MPIRG, Carleton students will become better acquainted with the issues.

As I assume we all are, I am extremely grateful for the education I have received thus far at Carleton. This, however, has not managed to preclude my consideration of its faults. I believe such consideration is crucial not only to the well being of any student, but also to that of the institution as a whole. The following is an attempt at what I’ve seen to be a fault; I leave it up to the reader to decide whether or not it’s imagined.

It’s said that strength comes in numbers. I see this statement becomes no clearer than in discussions of preventing sexual assault here on campus. Sure, situations of sexual assault are often between two people and often alone. But preventing incidents of sexual assault here on campus requires a mentality of many.

CAASHA is a group of students who are trained and available to provide non-judgmental listening, support, and information about resources for anyone affected by—or with questions about—sexual assault, harassment, or relationship abuse. CAASHA Office Hours are held six days a week in five different locations. We do this because we recognize that sexual harassment and assault are already talked about all over campus, and we would like to be a more accessible resource in supporting your conversations.

Over the past few weeks, Ryan McLaughlin and I have published articles exposing the College’s hypocritical budgetary priorities. We have shown that the College has failed to limit operating costs and allocate sufficient funds to financial aid. In this article, I examine a serious inequity in the College’s financial aid process. I argue that Carleton’s sponsorship of the National Merit Scholarship Program (NMSP) is both outmoded and unfair.

Mothers in the United States face the judgments of a culture that hesitates to consider the work of a mother as a legitimate job. There exists a general acknowledgement that the “work of a mother is never done” and yet there remains a crippling double standard faced by women who choose to become mothers.